[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 245 (Monday, December 21, 2020)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 82995-82998]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2020-28121]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R07-OAR-2020-0620; FRL-10017-81-Region 7]


Air Plan Approval; Missouri; Removal of Control of Emissions From 
Solvent Cleanup Operations

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing 
approval of a State Implementation Plan (SIP) revision submitted by the 
State of Missouri on January 15, 2019, and supplemented by letter on 
June 14, 2019. Missouri requests that the EPA remove a rule related to 
control of emissions from the solvent cleanup operations in the Kansas 
City, Missouri area from its SIP. This removal does not have an adverse 
effect on air quality. The EPA's proposed approval of this rule 
revision is in accordance with the requirements of the Clean Air Act 
(CAA).

DATES: Comments must be received on or before January 20, 2021.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R07-
OAR-2020-0620to https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online 
instructions for submitting comments.
    Instructions: All submissions received must include the Docket ID 
No. for this rulemaking. Comments received will be posted without 
change to https://www.regulations.gov/, including any personal 
information provided. For detailed instructions on sending comments and 
additional information on the rulemaking process, see the ``Written 
Comments'' heading in the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this 
document.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: William Stone, Environmental 
Protection Agency, Region 7 Office, Air Quality Planning Branch, 11201 
Renner Boulevard, Lenexa, Kansas 66219; telephone number: (913) 551-
7714; email address: [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document ``we,'' ``us,'' and 
``our'' refer to the EPA.

Table of Contents

I. Written Comments
II. What is being addressed in this document?
III. Background
IV. What is the EPA's analysis of Missouri's SIP revision request?
    A. 10 CSR 10-2.215 Applied to Existing Sources
    B. 10 CSR 10-2.215 was Expected To Be Solely Applicable to the 
Ford Motor Company's Kansas City Assembly Plant
    C. 10 CSR 10-2.215 Does Not Reduce VOC Emissions and May Be 
Removed From the SIP
V. Have the requirements for approval of a SIP revision been met?
VI. What action is the EPA taking?
VII. Incorporation by Reference
VIII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. Written Comments

    Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R07-OAR-2020-
0620 at https://www.regulations.gov. Once submitted, comments cannot be 
edited or removed from Regulations.gov. The EPA may publish any comment 
received to its public docket. Do not submit electronically any 
information you consider to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) 
or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. 
Multimedia submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be accompanied by a 
written comment. The written comment is considered the official comment 
and should include discussion of all points you wish to make. The EPA 
will generally not consider comments or comment contents located 
outside of the primary submission (i.e. on the web, cloud, or other 
file sharing system). For additional submission methods, the full EPA 
public comment policy, information about CBI or multimedia submissions, 
and general guidance on making effective comments, please visit https://www.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.

II. What is Being Addressed in this Document?

    The EPA is proposing to approve the removal of 10 Code of State 
Regulations (CSR) 10-2.215, Control of Emissions from Solvent Cleanup 
Operations, from the Missouri SIP.
    According to the June 14, 2019 letter from the Missouri Department 
of Natural Resources, available in the docket for this proposed action, 
Missouri rescinded the rule because there are no sources subject to the 
rule, and the rule is no longer necessary for attainment and 
maintenance of the 1979, 1997, or 2008 National Ambient Air Quality 
Standards (NAAQS) for Ozone.

III. Background

    The EPA established a 1-hour ozone NAAQS in 1971. 36 FR 8186 (April 
30, 1971). On March 3, 1978, the EPA designated Clay, Platte and 
Jackson counties (hereinafter referred to in this document as the 
``Kanas City Area'') in nonattainment of the 1971 1-hour ozone 
NAAQS,\1\ as required by the CAA Amendments of 1977. 43 FR 8962 (March 
3, 1978). On February 8, 1979, the EPA revised the 1-hour ozone NAAQS, 
referred to as the 1979 ozone NAAQS. 44 FR 8202 (February 8, 1979). On 
February 20, 1985, the EPA notified Missouri that the SIP was 
substantially inadequate (hereinafter referred to as the ``SIP Call'') 
to attain the 1-hour ozone NAAQS in the Kansas City Area. See 50 FR 
26198 (July 25, 1985).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Missouri's June 14, 2019 letter incorrectly states that the 
Kansas City area was designated as a nonattainment area for the 1979 
ozone NAAQS in 1978.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

[[Page 82996]]

    To address the SIP Call, Missouri submitted an attainment 
demonstration on May 21, 1986, and volatile organic compound (VOC) 
control regulations on December 18, 1987. See 54 FR 10322 (March 13, 
1989) and 54 FR 46232 (November 2, 1989). The EPA subsequently approved 
the revised control strategy for the Kansas City Area. See id.
    The EPA redesignated the Kansas City Area to attainment of the 1979 
1-hour ozone standard and approved the ozone maintenance plan on July 
23, 1992. 57 FR 27939 (June 23, 1992). Pursuant to section 175A of the 
CAA, the first 10-year maintenance period for the 1-hour ozone standard 
began on July 23, 1992, the effective date of the redesignation 
approval.
    In 1995, the Kansas City area violated the 1979 1-hour ozone 
standard. Missouri revised the control strategy and contingency 
measures in the maintenance plan, which was approved on June 24, 2002. 
67 FR 20036 (April 24, 2002). The revised control strategy included a 
newly promulgated RACT rule, 10 CSR 10-2.215, Control of Emissions from 
Solvent Cleanup Operations.
    On April 30, 2004, the EPA published a final rule in the Federal 
Register stating the 1979 ozone NAAQS would no longer apply (i.e., 
would be revoked) for an area one year after the effective date of the 
area's designation for the 8-hour ozone NAAQS. 69 FR 23951 (April 30, 
2004). The Kansas City Area was designated as an unclassifiable area 
for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS, effective June 15, 2004. See id. 
However, on May 3, 2005, EPA published a final rule designating the 
Kansas City Area as an attainment area for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS 
based on new monitoring data. See 70 FR 22801 (May 3, 2005). The 
effective date of the revocation of the 1979 1-hour ozone standard for 
the Kansas City Area was June 15, 2005. See 70 FR 44470 (August 3, 
2005). Missouri achieved the required maintenance of the 1979 1-hour 
ozone standard in 2014.
    As noted above, 10 CSR 10-2.215, Control of Emissions from Solvent 
Cleanup Operations, was approved into the Missouri SIP as a RACT rule, 
effective May 24, 2002. 67 FR 20036 (April 24, 2002). At the time that 
the rule was approved into the SIP, 10 CSR 10-2.215 applied to any 
person in the Clay, Jackson and Platte Counties in Missouri that 
performs or allows the performance of any cleaning operation involving 
the use of a VOC solvent or solvent solution that emitted over 500 
pounds per day of VOCs. The rule stated that once a source was subject 
to the rule, it would remain subject to the rule even if actual 
emissions drop below the 500 pounds per day of VOCs applicability 
level.
    The rule also contains a list of operations that are exempt from 
the rule:
    1. Cold cleaner;
    2. Open top vapor degreaser;
    3. Conveyorized cold cleaners;
    4. Conveyorized vapor degreaser;
    5. Nonmanufacturing area cleaning. Nonmanufacturing areas include 
cafeterias, laboratories, pilot facilities, restrooms, and office 
buildings;
    6. Cleaning operations for which there has been made a best 
available control technology, reasonably available control technology, 
or lowest achievable emission rate determination; and
    7. Cleaning operations which are subject to the Aerospace National 
Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutant Standards source 
category, under 40 CFR part 63, subpart GG.
    By letter dated January 15, 2019, Missouri requested that the EPA 
remove 10 CSR 10-2.215 from the SIP. Section 110(l) of the CAA 
prohibits EPA from approving a SIP revision that interferes with any 
applicable requirement concerning attainment and reasonable further 
progress (RFP), or any other applicable requirement of the CAA. The 
State supplemented its SIP revision with a June 14, 2019 letter in 
order to address the requirements of section 110(l) of the CAA.

IV. What is the EPA's analysis of Missouri's SIP revision request?

A. 10 CSR 10-2.215 Applied to Existing Sources

    In its June 14, 2019 letter, Missouri states that it intended its 
RACT rules, such as 10 CSR 10-2.215, to solely apply to existing 
sources in accordance with section 172(c)(1) of the CAA.\2\ Missouri 
states that although the applicability section of 10 CSR 10-2.215 
states that the rule applies to all persons who perform or allow the 
performance of cleaning operations that emit over 500 pounds per day of 
VOCs in Clay, Jackson and Platte Counties, the rule applied only to 
existing sources.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ The EPA agrees with Missouri's interpretation of CAA section 
172(c)(1) in regards to whether RACT is required for existing 
sources, but also notes that the State regulation establishing RACT 
may apply to new sources as well, dependent upon the State 
regulation's language.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The EPA notes that the rule required a 30% reduction in plant-wide 
industrial VOC cleaning solvent emissions by May 1, 2003, based on 
emissions in 1997 and 1998. This provides support for Missouri's 
assertion that the rule was intended to apply to existing sources, 
despite the language in the rule that states that it is applicable to 
any solvent cleaning operation in Clay, Jackson and Platte counties 
that emit VOCs above the applicability threshold.

B. 10 CSR 10-2.215 Was Expected To Be Solely Applicable to the Ford 
Motor Company's Kansas City Assembly Plant

    Missouri states that at the time of the rule's promulgation, the 
state expected that the rule would apply to a single existing source, 
the Ford Motor Company's Kansas City Assembly Plant (hereinafter ``Ford 
facility''). Missouri states that this is supported by a fiscal note in 
its rulemaking record that indicates that the rule applies to one 
automobile manufacturer.
    The EPA has reviewed the April 16, 2001 Missouri Register, Vol. 26, 
No. 8, available in the docket for this proposed action, and notes that 
the Ford Motor Company commented on Missouri's promulgation of the rule 
concerning the costs of the rule. In addition, Missouri's 1998 revision 
to the Kansas City Maintenance SIP for the 1979 Ozone NAAQS 
(hereinafter ``1998 Revision''), available in the docket for today's 
action, indicates that one major source that would be affected by the 
solvent cleaning regulation was the Ford Motor Company in Kansas City. 
The 1998 Revision states that the Ford facility reported 909.5 tons of 
VOC emissions in 1994, and estimated that the rule would reduce VOC 
emissions by 30%, or 272.8 tons per year in the Kansas City area. Based 
upon Missouri's rulemaking history associated with promulgation of 10 
CSR 10-2.215, and the 1998 Revision, the EPA agrees that the Ford 
facility was the only source expected to be subject to the rule.

C. 10 CSR 10-2.215 Does Not Reduce VOC Emissions and May Be Removed 
From the SIP

    The EPA notes that the text of 10 CSR 10-2.215 states that once a 
source exceeds the applicability level of 500 pounds of VOC emissions 
per day, it remains subject to the rule even if actual emissions drop 
below the applicability level of the rule. However, this does not 
prohibit Missouri from rescinding the rule if it can demonstrate that 
the rescission of the rule does not interfere with any applicable 
requirement concerning attainment and reasonable further progress 
(RFP), or any other applicable requirement of the CAA, as required by 
Section 110(l) of the CAA.
    The EPA has reviewed the Ford facility's 2008 Operating Permit 
number OP2008-044, and the 2015 Operating

[[Page 82997]]

Permit number OP2014-035, available in the docket for this proposed 
action. The operating permits do not list any solvent cleaning 
operations at the facility that are subject to 10 CSR 10-2.215, Control 
of Emissions From Solvent Metal Cleaning, and state that the rule is 
not applicable to the Ford facility. The Operating Permit states that 
emission point (EP) 42's miscellaneous solvent use related to 
maintenance activities including non-manufacturing area cleaning, 
facility painting, and other activities at the facility is exempt 
pursuant to 10 CSR 2.215(1)(C). 10 CSR 2.215(1)(C) exempts 
nonmanufacturing area cleaning which include cafeterias, laboratories, 
pilot facilities, restrooms, and office buildings.
    The documentation submitted by Missouri provides evidence that at 
least at the time that 10 CSR 10-2.215 was proposed, both Missouri and 
Ford expected that the Ford facility would be subject to the rule, and 
Missouri expected that the Ford facility would be the only source 
subject to the rule. According to Ford's Emissions Inventory 
Questionnaire (EIQ), VOC emissions from EP-42 were 428.36 tons in 1997, 
and 239.46 tons in 1998. However, before 10 CSR 10-2.215 was 
promulgated, Ford reduced its VOC emissions from EP-42 to 8.18 tons in 
2000, and emissions from EP-42 have since remained well below the 
applicability threshold of the rule, such that Ford was never subject 
to the rule's requirements. Therefore, the EPA agrees that the rule 
does not limit or reduce emissions of VOCs from any source in the 
Kansas City Area.
    Missouri's June 14, 2019 letter states that any new sources or 
major modifications of existing sources are subject to new source 
review (NSR) permitting. Under NSR, a new major source or major 
modification of an existing source with a (potential to emit) PTE of 
250 tons per year (tpy) or more of any NAAQS pollutant is required to 
obtain a Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) permit when the 
area is in attainment or unclassifiable, which requires an analysis of 
Best Available Control Technology (BACT) in addition to an air quality 
analysis and an additional impacts analysis. Sources with a PTE greater 
than 100 tpy, but less than 250 tpy, are required to obtain a minor 
permit in accordance with Missouri's New Source Review permitting 
program, which is approved into the SIP.\3\ The EPA agrees with this 
analysis.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ EPA's latest approval of Missouri's NSR permitting program 
rule was published in the Federal Register on October 11, 2016. 81 
FR 70025.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Missouri's June 14, 2019 letter also includes information 
concerning ozone air quality in the Kansas City area from 1996 through 
2018 that indicates a downward trend in monitored ozone design values. 
Missouri states that despite promulgation of more stringent ozone NAAQS 
in 1997, 2008 and 2015, the Kansas City area continues to monitor 
attainment. The EPA has confirmed that certified ambient air quality 
data for Kansas City Area as monitored at the Rocky Creek, Clay County 
state and local air monitoring station is compliant with the most 
recent ozone standard- the 2015 ozone NAAQS.\4\ The 2016-2018 design 
value for that monitor is 70 parts per million.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ In accordance 40 CFR 50.19(b), the 2015 8-hour primary 
O3 NAAQS is met at an ambient air quality monitoring site 
when 3-year average of the annual fourth-highest daily maximum 8-
hour average O3 concentration is less than or equal to 
0.070 ppm, as determined in accordance with appendix U to 40 CFR 
part 50.
    \5\ The monitoring data was reported, quality assured, and 
certified in accordance with the requirements set forth in 40 CFR 
part 58.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As stated above, Section 172(c)(1) of the CAA requires RACT for 
existing sources. Because Missouri has demonstrated that removal of 10 
CSR 10-2.215 will not interfere with attainment of the NAAQS, RFP \6\ 
or any other applicable requirement of the CAA because there are no 
existing sources that are subject to the rule, and therefore removal of 
the rule will not cause VOC emissions to increase, the EPA proposes to 
approve removal of 10 CSR 10-2.215 from the SIP.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ RFP is not applicable to the Kansas City Area because the 
area is in attainment of all applicable ozone standards.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

V. Have the requirements for approval of a SIP revision been met?

    The State submission has met the public notice requirements for SIP 
submissions in accordance with 40 CFR 51.102. The submission also 
satisfied the completeness criteria of 40 CFR part 51, appendix V. The 
State provided public notice on this SIP revision from February 28, 
2018, to April 5, 2018 and received five comments from the EPA that 
related to Missouri's lack of an adequate demonstration that the rule 
could be removed from the SIP in accordance with section 110(l) of the 
CAA. Missouri's June 14, 2019 letter addressed the EPA's comments. In 
addition, the revision meets the substantive SIP requirements of the 
CAA, including section 110 and implementing regulations.

VI. What action is the EPA taking?

    The EPA is proposing to approve Missouri's request to rescind 10 
CSR 2.215 from the SIP because the rule applied to a single source that 
has permanently ceased operations and because the rule was not 
applicable to additional sources, it no longer serves to reduce 
emissions. Additionally, the maintenance period for the 1979 ozone 
NAAQS for the Kansas City Area ended in 2014 and the area continues to 
monitor attainment of the 2015 Ozone NAAQS. Any new sources or major 
modifications of existing sources in the Kansas City Area are subject 
to NSR permitting. We are processing this as a proposed action because 
we are soliciting comments on this proposed action. Final rulemaking 
will occur after consideration of any comments.

VII. Incorporation by Reference

    In this document, the EPA is proposing to amend regulatory text 
that includes incorporation by reference. As described in the proposed 
amendments to 40 CFR part 52 set forth below, the EPA is proposing to 
remove provisions of the EPA-Approved Missouri Regulation from the 
Missouri State Implementation Plan, which is incorporated by reference 
in accordance with the requirements of 1 CFR part 51.

VIII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP 
submission that complies with the provisions of the Act and applicable 
Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in 
reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state choices, 
provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. Accordingly, this 
action merely approves state law as meeting Federal requirements and 
does not impose additional requirements beyond those imposed by state 
law. For that reason, this action:
     Is not a significant regulatory action subject to review 
by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Orders 12866 (58 
FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21, 2011);
     Is not an Executive Order 13771 (82 FR 9339, February 2, 
2017) regulatory action because SIP approvals are exempted under 
Executive Order 12866.
     Does not impose an information collection burden under the 
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
     Is certified as not having a significant economic impact 
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory 
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
     Does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or 
uniquely

[[Page 82998]]

affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded Mandates Reform 
Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);
     Does not have Federalism implications as specified in 
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
     Is not an economically significant regulatory action based 
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 
19885, April 23, 1997);
     Is not a significant regulatory action subject to 
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
     Is not subject to requirements of the National Technology 
Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTA) because this rulemaking does not 
involve technical standards; and
     Does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to 
address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental 
effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under 
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
    The SIP is not approved to apply on any Indian reservation land or 
in any other area where EPA or an Indian tribe has demonstrated that a 
tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of Indian country, the rule does 
not have tribal implications and will not impose substantial direct 
costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law as specified by 
Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by 
reference, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Volatile organic 
compounds.

    Dated: December 14, 2020.
James Gulliford,
Regional Administrator, Region 7.

    For the reasons stated in the preamble, the EPA proposes to amend 
40 CFR part 52 as set forth below:

PART 52--APPROVAL AND PROMULGATION OF IMPLEMENTATION PLANS

0
1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.

Subpart AA--Missouri

0
2. In Sec.  52.1320, the table in paragraph (c) is amended by removing 
the entry ``10-2.215'' under the heading ``Chapter 2--Air Quality 
Standards and Air Pollution Control Regulations for the Kansas City 
Metropolitan Area''.

[FR Doc. 2020-28121 Filed 12-18-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P